Thank you for visiting our forum. As a guest, you have limited access to view some discussion and articles. By joining our free community, you will be able to view all discussions and articles, post your own topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos, participate in Pick'Em contests and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today!!

The Floyd/Byrd treatment never sat well with me. Byrd was suspended 4 games but never played a down as an illegal player. Floyd played a full season and then got 2 games. Also, Byrd was considered a key piece of our NCAA sanctions, but UF never got any heat.

I've heard that the difference (2 vs. 4) was the two families' financial situation. If that is true, then how in the world is that relevant? Breaking the rules is breaking the rules.

Not saying NCAA rulings ever make sense, but this was far from apples-to-apples.

The Floyd/Byrd treatment never sat well with me. Byrd was suspended 4 games but never played a down as an illegal player. Floyd played a full season and then got 2 games. Also, Byrd was considered a key piece of our NCAA sanctions, but UF never got any heat.

I've heard that the difference (2 vs. 4) was the two families' financial situation. If that is true, then how in the world is that relevant? Breaking the rules is breaking the rules.

Not saying NCAA rulings ever make sense, but this was far from apples-to-apples.

The difference was that the guys running that foundation were USC grads. Even though they had helped many kids and Byrd was the 1st one to come to USC. That was where the problem was.

Floyd's adoptive father is supposedly the USC booster who is basically not allowed to have anything to do with the school because of NCAA sanctions. If I am not mistaken he was also involved in the Byrd/Floyd incident since his 'disavowal', for lack of a better word, happened last fall.

The Floyd/Byrd treatment never sat well with me. Byrd was suspended 4 games but never played a down as an illegal player. Floyd played a full season and then got 2 games. Also, Byrd was considered a key piece of our NCAA sanctions, but UF never got any heat.

I've heard that the difference (2 vs. 4) was the two families' financial situation. If that is true, then how in the world is that relevant? Breaking the rules is breaking the rules.

Not saying NCAA rulings ever make sense, but this was far from apples-to-apples.

I remember that too when they stated they took into account his background which is complete b.s. I understand that for some kids especially in poverty it is difficult to turn down things but the punishment should be standard and not based on socioeconomic status.

I see opportunities for attorneys to create a nationwide system to assist in "adoption" of high school players by wealthy alumni. This system would make adoption easier and available to all high school athletes with the credentials to make it to the next level. It is a wonderful solution to the problem of how to fairly compensate college athletes; as long as it is all legal of course.

But let's not stop there. These young athletes will need "Adoption Councilors" to help them through the process, negotiate the adoptive arrangement including proper living conditions and parental support, and insure that the terms of the adoption contract are fair and commensurate with the athlete's future potential. After all, we don't want a bunch of fat cat alums taking advantage of youth and inexperience.

Lastly, we will need to increase the size and scope of the NCAA so they can adequately monitor the activities of student athletes and the collegiate institutions. Enforcement of the rules will be paramount to maintaining the integrity of college athletics. It's ok for "Johnny QB" to drive a Bentley provided by his adoption parents, but, we sure can't allow average fans to do anything so crazy as providing homemade cookies to the players after a game. I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere!

All of this makes perfect sense. Student athletes are fairly treated; jobs are created; wealth is distributed more evenly throughout societal strata and the NCAA gets greater authority and wider scope. Are there any losers in this scenario?

Your OL is in better shape than ours. This is where area where I think we haven't been good enough. Your line opens holes and pass protects better than we do so hopefully we adopt players better than you! :)

It means Urban, Sharriff, and Jesus are walking hand-in-hand just like Urban dreamed they would

Quote:

Originally Posted by uscjeremynca

Your OL is in better shape than ours. This is where area where I think we haven't been good enough. Your line opens holes and pass protects better than we do so hopefully we adopt players better than you! :)